Aim: To review the experience and to evaluate the results of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) via helical tomotherapy (HT), for the treatment of brachytherapy-unsuitable cervical cancer.

Methods: Between September 1, 2008 to January 31, 2012, nine cervical cancer patients unsuitable for brachytherapy were enrolled. All of the patients received definitive whole pelvic radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy, followed by SBRT via HT.

Results: The actuarial locoregional control rate at 3 years was 78%. The mean biological equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions of the tumor, rectum, bladder, and intestines was 76.0 ± 7.3, 73.8 ± 13.2, 70.5 ± 10.0, and 43.1 ± 7.1, respectively. Only two had residual tumors after treatment, and the others were tumor-free. Two patients experienced grade 3 acute toxicity: one had diarrhea; and another experienced thrombocytopenia. There were no grade 3 or 4 subacute toxicities. Three patients suffered from manageable rectal bleeding in months 11, 14, and 25, respectively. One stage I VA patient experienced fistula formation in month 3.

Conclusion: SBRT via HT provides the possibility for treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer in patients who are unsuitable for brachytherapy. Long-term follow up and enrollment of more such patients to receive SBRT via the HT technique are warranted.

Aim: To review the experience and to evaluate the results of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) via helical tomotherapy (HT), for the treatment of brachytherapy-unsuitable cervical cancer.

Methods: Between September 1, 2008 to January 31, 2012, nine cervical cancer patients unsuitable for brachytherapy were enrolled. All of the patients received definitive whole pelvic radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy, followed by SBRT via HT.

Results: The actuarial locoregional control rate at 3 years was 78%. The mean biological equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions of the tumor, rectum, bladder, and intestines was 76.0 ± 7.3, 73.8 ± 13.2, 70.5 ± 10.0, and 43.1 ± 7.1, respectively. Only two had residual tumors after treatment, and the others were tumor-free. Two patients experienced grade 3 acute toxicity: one had diarrhea; and another experienced thrombocytopenia. There were no grade 3 or 4 subacute toxicities. Three patients suffered from manageable rectal bleeding in months 11, 14, and 25, respectively. One stage I VA patient experienced fistula formation in month 3.

Conclusion: SBRT via HT provides the possibility for treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer in patients who are unsuitable for brachytherapy. Long-term follow up and enrollment of more such patients to receive SBRT via the HT technique are warranted.